Jim Wallis, a Social Gospel Activist, Says It’s Time for More Gun Control.

Jesus wants the U.S. government to ban guns except those owned by government-licensed hunters and guns carried by law-enforcement officers or the military.

How do we know this? Because Jim Wallis says so.

Who is Jim Wallis? He is a Left-wing Democrat. He has never been anything else. He has spent 40 years trying to persuade theologically conservative Protestants that Jesus taught a gospel that conforms to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society agenda . . . only more so. He thinks it is time to go way beyond Johnson’s hesitant efforts.

He campaigns incessantly for the welfare state. He says that Christianity teaches the welfare state. I have made it a sideline in my own ministry to refute him, point by point.

His main theological message is this: Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.

He also is a gun control advocate. This is consistent.

He is very upset by the National Rifle Association. He writes the following:

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said this as his response to the massacre of children at Sandy Hook elementary in Newtown, Conn.: “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

That statement is at the heart of the problem of gun violence in America today — not just because it is factually flawed, which of course it is, but also because it is morally mistaken, theologically dangerous, and religiously repugnant.

Jesus said this:

“When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” “Nothing,” they answered. He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: `And he was numbered with the transgressors’ ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.” The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That is enough,” he replied. (Luke 22:35-38, NIV)

But this carries no weight in Wallis’s circles. They cry: “Proof-texting! Proof-texting!” What is proof-texting? It is quoting Bible verses that are not compatible with theological liberalism, political liberalism, or gun control.

He begins with a platitude: “The world is not full of good and bad people; that is not what our scriptures teach us. We are, as human beings, both good and bad. This is not only true of humanity as a whole, but we as individuals have both good and bad in us.”

He uses this platitude to draw a conclusion that in no way follows: “When we are bad or isolated or angry or furious or vengeful or politically agitated or confused or lost or deranged or unhinged — and we have the ability to get and use weapons only designed to kill large numbers of people — our society is in great danger.”

Great danger? All 315 million Americans are in great danger? Day and night, night and day? From people with unnamed weapons of mass murder? Sorry, but I had not noticed. Sporadic acts of violence are common throughout history. What makes the United States uniquely vulnerable in 2013?

Notice, he says “we,” as in you and I. When “we have the ability to get and use weapons only designed to kill large numbers of people — our society is in great danger.” I ask: “What about them?” Gang members, maniacs, and rapists. He does not say.

What are these weapons “only designed to kill large numbers of people”? He does not say. So, we are left to speculate.

What about a government that has so much power that it can prohibit such weapons? Can it prohibit other weapons? He does not speculate.

As we have just seen again, when such destructive weapons are allowed to be used out of powerful emotion without restraint or rules, that is bad.

He ignores the obvious: there are rules. There are laws against murder.

In dangerous situations, we as parents cannot tell our children they are safe. We cannot, because they are not. After Sandy Hook many child psychologists were counseling parents like us (I have a 9-year-old and 14-year-old) to hold and love our children, tell them they were safe. We can and did hold and love them, but we cannot tell them they are safe. Not as long as such weapons are available to human beings when they are acting badly.

Let me understand this. We – you and I – cannot tell our children they are safe as long as such unnamed weapons are available to “human beings when they are acting badly.” They are also not safe from intruders, kidnappers, and a mentally deranged parent who uses a knife to kill his children. In short, Wallis is using a definition of safety that is ludicrous: safety from AK-47s or Kalishnokov’s or Uzis. If we could just prohibit private citizens from owning these, we could then tell our children they are safe. That is the inescapable implication of how he frames his argument.

The ideology of gun control makes its adherents sound silly.

What about AK-47s and Kalishnikovs and Uzis? These weapons do exist. They can be purchased on any black market in the world. You only need money and connections. Gangs have both. How is gun control going to make our children safe — at long last! — by officially banning ownership of these weapons?

There is another way to get safer. He does not mention it. Own guns and know how to use them. This is called self-defense.

We can call the police, of course. How long until they arrive?

Wallis skips over such matters. He says:

When we are good, we want to protect our children — not by having more guns than the bad people, but by making sure guns aren’t the first available thing to people when they’re being bad. Being good is protecting people and our children from guns that are outside of the control of rules, regulations, and protections for the rest of us.

He has shifted from calling for gun controls on undefined guns to all guns. But how, pray tell, can we “make sure guns aren’t first available to people when they are being bad”? The word “Prohibition” comes to mind. The phrase “war on drugs” also comes to mind.

Wallis admits that all men are good and bad. Then how, I wonder, can we keep weapons away from good people whenever they choose to become bad people? What law can provide this? What law-enforcement system can provide this? I call this Edward Hyde legislation. It requires every Dr. Jekyll to turn over his guns temporarily whenever he feels Edward Hyde coming on.

No law can do this. Wallis knows this. But, being a liberal Democrat, he thinks that it is better to disarm innocent people, even though evil people will be able to buy guns on the black market. “It’s the principle of the thing,” we are told. What principle? “To become 100% dependent on the State for our safety.”

Here is their bumper sticker: Facing a Murderer? Call 911.

Finally, what will make a difference this time? Only two things I can think of. First, is if people of faith respond differently just because they are people of faith — that our faith overcomes our politics here, and that gun owners and gun advocates who are people of faith will act in this situation as people of faith, distinctively and differently.

President Harding invented word to describe a form of public speaking: bloviate. He defined it as follows: “the art of speaking for as long as the occasion warrants, and saying nothing.” Alan Greenspan was a master of bloviation. Jim Wallis is not far behind.

He says: “Parents across the spectrum, gun owners or not, must demand a new national conversation on guns.” But we have had that conversation for decades. It boils down to this: (1) “The State alone has the right to own guns. Hand yours over.” (2) “An armed citizenry is the basis of liberty. Read the Second Amendment.”

He leaves us with this argument. He expects it to persuade defenders of the Second Amendment to turn over their guns to the government unless they are government-licensed hunters.

I was putting my 9-year-old to bed a few nights ago. He said, “Dad I heard you talking on the phone about guns and the press conference you’re talking at tomorrow. “

“What do you think about it Jack? What do you think about it Jack?” I asked him.

And here’s what Jack said:

“I think that they ought to let people who, like licensed hunters, have guns if they use them to hunt. And people who need guns — who need guns for their job like policemen and army. But I don’t think that we should just let anybody have any kind of gun and any kind of bullets that they want. That’s pretty crazy.”

Jesus said to buy a sword. The nine-year-old son of a Left-wing Democrat thinks otherwise.

Posting Policy:We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

30 thoughts on “Jim Wallis, a Social Gospel Activist, Says It’s Time for More Gun Control.”

Gun control, Algerian hostage crisis, reopen the Natalie Wood case. Anything to keep the serfs' minds off the fact that the US is broke and the government can't fix any of the problems at home anymore.

Jim Wallis, English for Dipshmidt. What a dope. He evidently didn’t fare well in his theological studies, and he certainly flunked US Government 101 where they covered the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. Mr. Wallis’ views are pure hogwash.

He gives ministers a bad name. What he preaches is nothing Jesus said. I think I will just have to go with my theological gut on this one and protect myself. Then after I am raptured out of here he is welcome to beat my shotgun and my pistol into plows. I won't need them anymore

Just another example of the "narrative" that is being promoted by those who want the absolute power over the general citizenry, that of using any avenue as a means to persuade the gullible citizen to actually believe in their needs being fulfilled by the government.
The backers of the narative know that they can not merely convince the citizens to "disarm" themselves, that there are too many who do still have faith in what the Founding Fathers gave us to protect; a Constitutional Republic. But they unashamedly use whatever conveluted dialouge to get us to believe them. Wallis, is another prime example of quoting the bible ( The Word of God) out of context to further the narrative of the agenda. This shows to what level they will stoop.
And when countered, they will villify, condem, and chastize the person because they can not counter the truth.
I am sure that as a student of the Word of God, in a one on one discussion, I would be able to take more scripture and turn this narrative on its head. But at the same time, I know that the truth will never be heard by those formenting the agenda and the narrative.

"Because most of today’s pulpits are filled with antinomian, pacifist, anti-gun pastors [such as Jim Wallis], the majority of today’s Christians are unaware that Yahweh has ordered His disciples to arm themselves. Consequently, Christian men have had to look to the Second Amendment for their authority to keep and bear arms. Had they been following the Apostle Paul’s instructions in 2 Timothy 2:15 (“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”) instead of relying on such pastors, they would have found their authority in the Bible and not the U.S. Constitution.

"The question regarding firearms is one of self-defense. Does the Bible sanction self-defense?

'If the thief is caught while breaking in, and is struck so that he dies, there will be no bloodguiltiness on his account. But if the sun has risen on him, there will be bloodguiltiness on his account.' (Exodus 22:2-3, NASB)….

"Yahweh’s law clearly provides for self-defense as demonstrated in this statute. Because this statute is case law, it likewise vindicates a person who kills a daytime assailant."

For more, see "Firearms: Scripturally Defended" at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/onlineBook…. Also, online Chapter 12 "Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense" of "Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective" on our Online Book Page.

So the conversation was quickly ended with the excuse of, "well I can't decide what gets put on the news". I countered with the thoughts of journalistic integrity and their personal responsibility to such; but as with most, the paycheck comes first.
So the narraitve will continue and if those who want to defend the Second Amendment and their liberties are to prevail, they have to be willing to proclaim the willingness to take it to the ultimate sacrifice to do so. I did, and that made them think, I knew they were thinking because of the silence and the stare of unbelief in their eyes.

And because they can not "fix" anything here, they will allow this nation to crumble and then control by force; thus the removal of our means of defense on a level playing feild. Distraction and diversion is all they have , the truth is on the side of Freedom loving American citizens; that, and their willingness to take this to whatever level is needed to remain Free.

I've been on to him for a long time. If I'm not mistaken, he aligned himself with Glen Beck at one time.

I would like to suggest a book by Kevin DeYoung & Greg Gilbert titled "What Is the Mission of the Chyrch"? Sub title: MAKING SENSE of SOCIAL JUSTICE, SHALOM, and the GREAT COMMISSION.

It's the best biblical explanation I have ever read of what it means to :feed the poor." It is contrary to everything that you have ever read or heard about equality if you heard it from Obama or liberals in general including Jim Wallis. It removes the potential for a lot of guilt about what God really says concerning taking from the rich to give to the not so rich. We are called to help the less fortunate but not in the way that the liberals and do gooders would have us believe.

Mr. Wallis is also one of the fools that think Jesus ordered them to abort over 1-million children every year. Liberals have rewritten history, and have now focused their attention towards rewriting the Bible and the Constitution. This one will be tougher. There's a whole bunch of good copies out here that can't be changed. Besides, we're on to Liberals now.

Woe, there is one come out of thee, that imagineth evil against Yahweh, a wicked counsellor. Let them be confounded and put to shame that seek after my soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt.

Zechariah 8
17 And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith יהוה (YAH.)

Isaiah 5.20
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Micah 2.1 Woe to them that devise iniquity, and work evil upon their beds! when the morning is light, they practise it, because it is in the power of their hand.

Psalms 36.
1 The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes.
2 For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful.
3 The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good.
4 He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil.

On April 19, 1775, British troops, some 800 strong, were dispatched to Concord, Massachusetts, to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock and to seize a cache of weapons known to be stored at Concord. When Dr. Joseph Warren sent Paul Revere to warn Pastor Jonas Clark (in whose home Adams and Hancock were staying) that the Crown’s troops were on their way to arrest the two men and seize the guns at Concord, he alerted his male congregants. About 60-70 men from the Church of Lexington stood armed on Lexington Green awaiting the Red Coats.

“The world is not full of good and bad people; that is not what our scriptures teach us. We are, as human beings, both good and bad. This is not only true of humanity as a whole, but we as individuals have both good and bad in us.”

And when the bad person puts a gun in your face do you respond with a bible verse or protect your family and yourself?

Who is this joker anyway? where did he come from? I'll bet the south side of Chicago.I've been preaching the Gospel for 40 years myself and this is the first time I've heard his name. The God that I know and serve is a God of war. The reason our wonderful country is in this shape today, is because of illiterate, halfwitt hacks like this clown are out there telling people trash
like this. The best part about this is from the Bible its self, it says All liars and decievers and cheaters and thieves will be cast into the fires of hell forever. A real preacher Loves Gods people enough to tell them the truth! Also I bet the hot shot has never worn a military uniform of any kind.

Do you think Mr. Wallis carries a concealed weapon? Or does he have body guards who do? The day Obama gets rid of all his body guards with guns during his occupation of the Oval Office I may consider giving up my guns. I will rearm as soon as he is gone just in casr we get any dingbat in the Oval Office.

The scriptures warned us about these self appointed prophets and who they serve, The Messiah told us why he came to establish the Law and the Prophets not destroy, so it would be good to research through your scriptures to see what Gospel really mean.

And actually, the quote is a misrepresentation of Scripture. The Bible is much less complimentary toward us than to say we all have both bad and good in us. That's humanistic tripe. From God's point of view, we're all fallen, depraved and lost. We're so lost, in fact, that He had to send His Son in order for us to have any chance at all. If we were both good and bad, then we would have the choice of choosing the good and getting to heaven on our own. If that were possible, Jesus wouldn't have had to die. People just don't think things through. And a supposed theologian like Wallis should know all this…so is he ignorant, or lying?